scholarly journals Influence and the New American Revolution

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-44
Author(s):  
Raghav Sharma
Keyword(s):  
American Revolution ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
American Government ◽  
Finance Reform ◽  
Effect Change ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
And Control ◽  
The Relationship

Contemporary political discourse in the United States is rife with ideas on how our society can change and reform — in particular, issues such as campaign finance reform, income inequality, and the use and control of firearms are in need of a comprehensive response that is attentive to the needs and will of the American people. Sadly, the relationship between the American people and our government is currently in a dismal state. This relationship between the people and the government has become unbalanced and unfair, reducing the likelihood of change and deterring individuals from believing in their ability to influence such reform. The need to understand our capacity to effect change, though, is absolutely necessary. The issues facing the American government at this time are as numerous as they are serious, but ideas and proposals are coming forward with the potential to rebalance this relationship. More importantly, they have the potential to usher in a new American Revolution that makes good on the democratic promise of a government for, of and by the people. 

scholarly journals Rhetorical Analysis of Joe Biden’s Inauguration Address

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-82
Author(s):  
Neni Nurkhamidah ◽  
Raihana Ziani Fahira ◽  
Ayu Ratna Ningtyas
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Rhetorical Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
Rhetorical Theory ◽  
American People ◽  
Inaugural Address ◽  
The People ◽  
Government Leader ◽  
The Government ◽  
Aristotelian Rhetoric

The inaugural speeches mark the beginning of a new term in office for a community or government leader, such as the president. This reaction must persuade the people to believe in the government and the programs will be enacted. This research aims at finding the rhetorical appeals of President Joe Biden's inaugural address on his inauguration as the 46th President of the United States. The research is based on Aristotle's theory called a rhetorical theory. The resercher employs descriptive qualitative as a methodology to analyze the data from the spoken utterances of the speech. The result shows that Joe Biden uses all of the Aristotelian rhetoric strategies in his inaugural address, which are: ethos, pathos, and logos. The data shows that Joe Biden uses pathos as 55% of his speech, followed by ethos 37%, and logos 8%.. Joe Biden skillfully used and implied Aristotle's rhetorical theory in his inauguration address to engage and build trust with the American people. From the analysis, the researcher has concluded that a good speaker can use all of the three elements of the rhetorical theory and imply them in the speech or writing.

scholarly journals Ideology and Public Policy: Antistatism in American Welfare State Transformation

2005 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Quadagno ◽  
Debra Street
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Private Property ◽  
Civil Disobedience ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
State Transformation ◽  
American Government ◽  
The Government ◽  
Liberal Culture

Henry David Thoreau's influential essay “Civil Disobedience,” published in 1849, began with a ringing declaration of opposition to government: “I heartily accept the motto, ‘That government is best which governs least’; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—‘That government is best which governs not at all.’…the character of the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way.” Thoreau's statement summarizes a central thesis in political theory, what has become a historical constant in the minds of researchers seeking to explain the development and parameters of the American welfare state. This thesis is that any power given to the government is subtracted from the liberty of the governed, a concept best captured by the term “antistatism.” Thus, Lipset contends that the United States is dominated by an encompassing liberal culture that honors private property, distrusts state authority, and holds individual rights sacred. Similarly, according to Huntington, Americans live by a creed that views government as the most dangerous embodiment of power. For Morone, American government is a “polity suspicious of its own state.” Hartz, too, asserts that the master assumption is that “the power of the state must be limited.”

Political Community in Revolutionary Pennsylvania, 1774-1800

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Owen
Keyword(s):  
American Revolution ◽  
Political Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Power Structures ◽  
Early American ◽  
The People ◽  
Governmental Institutions ◽  
Popular Mobilization

Political Community in Revolutionary Pennsylvania challenges the ways we understand popular sovereignty in the American Revolution, demonstrating how ordinary citizens wielded significant political power. Previous histories place undue focus on either elite political thought or class analysis; on the contrary, citizens cared most about the establishment of a representative, publicly legitimate political process. Popular activism constrained leaders, creating a system through which governmental actions were made more representative of the will of the community. This book analyzes developments in Pennsylvania from 1774, and the passage of the Intolerable Acts, through to 1800 and the election of Thomas Jefferson. It examines the animating philosophy of the Pennsylvania state constitution of 1776, a “radical manifesto” espousing a vision of popular sovereignty in which government was devolved from the people only where necessary. The legitimacy of governmental institutions rested on their demonstration that they operated through popular consent, expressed in a variety of forms of popular mobilization. This book examines how early Americans interacted with the power structures shaping the world in which they lived, recasting the nature of the American Revolution and illuminating the origins of modern American political practice. It investigates how political mobilization operated inside and outside formal channels of government. Mechanisms of popular mobilization helped a diverse population mediate with governmental institutions, providing the foundation of early American power. Histories that ignore this relationship miss one of the most significant founding characteristics of the United States—the importance of popular politics and democratic practice in the establishment of American government.

Democracy and Excellence: Concord or Conflict?

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 535-537
Author(s):  
Laura Stephenson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Class Structure ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic Societies ◽  
The Relationship

Democracy and Excellence: Concord or Conflict?, Joseph Romance and Neil Reimer, eds., Westport CN: Praeger, 2005, 166, pp. xiv.This volume is the product of a question, asked by Neal Reimer, about the relationship between democracy and excellence. Reimer provides background for this relationship in the first chapter, noting that it can be framed as government by the people versus standards of the good, true and beautiful. Conflict can arise between the two ideas because democracy prioritizes equality of citizens—but excellence depends upon the recognition of differentiating merit. While democracy provides citizens freedom from a limiting class structure, the lack of structure can make citizens indifferent to pursuing a noble vision of the state. Reimer argues, however, that there is a fundamental harmony between democracy and excellence and that examples of excellence in democratic societies (such as the United States) are many. It is possible and likely that democratic societies will attain excellence in practice.

Andrew Jackson, Black American Slavery, and the Trail of Tears

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-138
Author(s):  
Earnest N. Bracey ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Native Americans ◽  
Life Time ◽  
The United States ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
American People ◽  
Andrew Jackson ◽  
Common Humanity ◽  
American Slavery ◽  
The People

Many revisionist historians today try to make the late President Andrew Jackson out to be something that he was not—that is, a man of all the people. In our uninhibited, polarized culture, the truth should mean something. Therefore, studying the character of someone like Andrew Jackson should be fully investigated, and researched, as this work attempts to do. Indeed, this article tells us that we should not accept lies and conspiracy theories as the truth. Such revisionist history comes into sharp focus in Bradley J. Birzer’s latest book, In Defense of Andrew Jackson. Indeed, his (selective) efforts are surprisingly wrong, as he tries to give alternative explanations for Jackson’s corrupt life and political malfeasance. Hence, the lawlessness of Andrew Jackson cannot be ignored or “white washed” from American history. More important, discrediting the objective truth about Andrew Jackson, and his blatant misuse of executive power as the U.S. President should never be dismissed, like his awful treatment of Blacks and other minorities in the United States. It should have been important to Birzer to get his story right about Andrew Jackson, with a more balanced approach in regards to the man. Finally, Jackson should have tried to eliminate Black slavery in his life time, not embrace it, based on the ideas of human dignity and our common humanity. To be brutally honest, it is one thing to disagree with Andrew Jackson; but it is quite another to feel that he, as President of the United States, was on the side of all the American people during his time, because it was not true. Perhaps the biggest question is: Could Andrew Jackson have made a positive difference for every American, even Black slaves and Native Americans?

Regulatory Administration: An Evolving and Neglected Area of Public Administration in India

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 686-702
Author(s):  
Yudhishthira Sapru ◽  
R.K. Sapru
Keyword(s):  
National Level ◽  
Current Phase ◽  
The Public ◽  
The People ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Governance Process ◽  
Regulatory Bodies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Political Economic ◽  
And Control

In the current phase of liberalisation, privatisation and globalisation, and now broadly governance, regulatory administration has acquired growing importance as an instrument of achieving socio-economic objectives. It is through instrumentality of regulatory administration that the government is able to exercise effective political and economic sovereignty and control over the country’s governance process and resources. Governments of nearly all developing countries have initiated policies and procedures to promote and strengthen regulatory bodies and agencies. However, the results of these promotional and regular activities have varied considerably, often reflecting large inadequacies in policies, organisational structures and procedures. Increasing emphasis is now being placed at the national level on a more flexible regulatory administration to enforce compliance with nationally established policies and requirements in various political, economic and social spheres. As a watchdog for the public interest, governments both at central and state levels should engage in activities for the promotion of social and economic justice, so as to ensure the happiness and prosperity of the people.

Text of Resolution Which Entered the United States into World War

1917 ◽  
Vol 85 (17) ◽  
pp. 455-456
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
German Government ◽  
The People ◽  
Successful Termination ◽  
The World ◽  
The Government

The following is the text of the resolutions which officially entered the United States into the world war:— “Whereas the imperial German government has committed repeated acts of war against the government and the people of the United States of America; therefore be it “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the imperial German government, which has thus been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared; and that the President be and he is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the government to carry on war against the imperial German government; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.”

scholarly journals Merebaknya Intoleransi (Hate Speech dan Hate Crime) dalam Politik Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-99
Author(s):  
Munandzirul Amin
Keyword(s):  
Hate Crime ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Order ◽  
New Order ◽  
The People ◽  
Technical Issues ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Relationship

Democracy provides a place for us to learn to live with the enemy because only democracy allows tension and paradox, which comes from freedom, to occur in society. In contrast to the New Order era, we can now enjoy freedom of opinion and association. This freedom can in turn produce tension. The relationship between elements of society with one another, or the relationship between the state and elements of society, can be tense because of differences in interests in regulating social and political order. Meanwhile, Indonesian society witnessed the paradox which also originated from freedom. This, for example, is shown by the emergence of intolerant groups such as the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI) and Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia (HTI). Even organizations such as HTI are of the view that democracy is not in accordance with the teachings of Islam in terms of sovereignty in the hands of the people, what should determine that is the preogrative right of Allah SWT. The government in the view of HTI only implements sharia and determines administrative technical issues.

scholarly journals Book Review | George Will’s Conservatism and Democracy in Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
The United States ◽  
James Madison ◽  
American Government ◽  
Federalist Papers ◽  
The Federalist ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Federalist Papers

Americans typically view the United States as a democracy and are rightly proud of that. Of course, as those of a more precise nature, along with smug college students enrolled in introductory American government classes, are quick to point out, the United States is technically a republic. This is a bit too clever by half since James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, defined a republic the way most people think of a democracy—a system of representative government with elections: “[The]… difference between a Democracy and a Republic are, first the delegation of the Government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest.” What the framers thought of as democracy is today referred to as direct democracy, the belief that citizens should have more direct control over governing. The Athenian assembly was what the framers, Madison in particular, saw as the paragon of direct democracy—and as quite dangerous. While direct democracy has its champions, most Americans equate democracy with electing officials to do the business of government.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document